What many are missing is the fact that our fellow BOFHs have to learn _yet another_ OS.
There were a lot of MCPs for Win 95.
There are a lot of MCSEs for Win NT.
There are not as many MCSEs for Win 2k.
There are even less who can handle the innards of Win XP.
Training, and the inevitable learning curve (not to mention trying to figure out where and how to patch this new beast) will prove to be far far far more expensive than any silly upgrade cost.
---It was written---
If it is a minor one, it might be fixed. If it's regular, it will be fixed some day. If it's big, it will be fixed and rather soon. If it's huge and does what you fear/describe, it will be fixed ASAP.
---end---
This is assuming that
1) Microsoft acknowledges the bug
2) Microsoft considers the bug to be 'huge'
3) Microsoft wants to or has a reason to release a bug fix.
As is well known, MS releases major software with large numuber of major bugs- many of which are known about _months_ before release. This doesn't include the hundreds and probably thousands of minor bugs, errors and 'undocumented features' that fill up KB articles on a daily basis.
---more inclusion---
There are not so many precautions you can take, really, since no software company holds itself liable for any of its products. The best thing you can do to avoid the risk is simply by not using it.
---end---
Um. Given that MS has quite the stranglehold on the marketplace (I'll avoid the use of the work 'monopoly'. Oops.:| ) it is a bit unrealistic to 'avoid using MS software' at this time. Linux and alternatives should be explored and, as time goes and those products improve to a level where the non-geek can use them (remember the non-geeks all you Linux heads? There's a lot of 'em, you know) with some sense of ease. (side note, off comment, Linux has done a poor job, IMO, in marketing itself as 'user friendly').
---last inclusion---
I am sure insurance companies will insure you against horrible software plagues, they seem to insure almost anything including not getting any snow or sun on respectivily winter and summer holidays.
---end---
You've an unfortunately poor understanding of insurance companies then. Insurance companies will only cover you when they can be sure that they, the company, will collect enough from premiums _or from liable parties_ to make covering your losses worthwhile.
In case of thing in nature, there isn't a party to recover damages from. However, lets say your car breaks and causes you to have an accident. Your Happy Insurance Company pays out damages. Then it turns into Mean Insurance Company and sues the other driver, the car companies, etc (on your behalf, frequently) to recover those costs.
Insurance is not a philantropical business.:)
So, then. Are you thinking that the Good Insurance Company is going to give you money for when your software breaks (oh yeah, you have to prove that it wasn't your fault)? And that the Good Insurance Company is going to then try and recover those costs from the Software Company and be able to succeed?
Read your user agreement- you're taking the software _AS IS_. This means no insurance company in the universe is going to be insuring software any time soon.
And yes, to keep this on-topic, the activation code is just plain stupid, it attacks those who are the least likey to pirate significantly anyways, its meaningless technologically (given the fact that a crack was available less than 24 hours after the post of the latest beta) and its just all plain stupid.
peace,
r.
Sheesh people. Its not that hard. Look- at age 12 or so (yes, Virginia, there are surveys that back this up, do your own damn research), girls lose interest in computers. Up to about that point, girls and boys regularly enjoy computers. After that, nothing. Why? What sort of computer programs are there to attract the attention of girls? Do you really think a 13 year old girl is interested in playing the latest blood-bath game? Do you really think that a smart teenage girl is really going to get interested in a career in computers by playing 'Barbies Make-Up CD Kit'? Read this, software designers: There Is Nothing For Girls To Do On Computers. If You Make Something For Girls To Do On Computers, Then More Girls Will Learn To Enjoy And Use Computers. If You Make Software That Is Easier For Girls And Women To Navigate, More Girls And Women Will Use That Software. You Will Make More Money. Now, was that so damn hard?
The 5th and 6th points are actually pretty strong. The Supreme Court of the US consistantly has regarded the first amendment very strongly. In these two points, Boies is saying, basically, that because Napster is doing nothing wrong, their first amendment rights cannot be taken away. Those rights include the ability to post lists of available music on-line, as Napster does.
The third point is strong in that there are legal limits to copyright use, those including 'space shifting' and 'fair use sampling'. Boies has some evidence that Napster is being used by people to listen (sample) music before purchasing. This is similar to reading a movie or book review- portions of the book are allowed under copyright law to be used in cases of review or to assist in making a pre-purchase decision. Those rights have been backed up with many precedences.
The whole point being: Napster has legitimate uses. Doesn't matter if the RIAA doesn't _like_ those uses, Napster can be used for legal means, and so shutting down Napster is illegal.
Its a good brief, and the argument that because the RIAA abused their copyright protection illegally, they no longer can defend their own copyrights...there is an interesting statment...
I wonder what the movie industry is burning in their offices today...:)
Re:Mattel and the Learning Company are screwed up
on
Mattel Spyware
·
· Score: 3
Here is some truth about Mattel and software. Back a few years ago, the head of the Barbie Doll division of Mattel (Jill Barad) became CEO of Mattel in what was considered at the time to be a reasonably unfriendly coup. After her rise, Mattel made two major purchases- one was the American Girl company (they make dolls, for 780 million) and one was the Learning Company (they 'make' software, and Mattel spent from 3-4 _b_illion dollars on the company). After the acquisition of the Learning Company (who had bought Broderbund a bit earlier to being bought by Mattel), Mattel went into serious E-Toy mode and released many many software packages, electronic gear, web sites, etc. It was Jill Barad's way of getting into the 'new market'. Well, as time passed, and people realized the new software sucked (ie- they stopped buying it...which is a BIG CLUE to those who are seeking to end the corporate realm. Make a product that doesn't suck and is easy to use and people will buy it), and, well, they stopped buying it. As of last year, the Learning Company division of Mattel lost some 1.1 billion dollars (equal, interestingly enough, to the amount of money that the Barbie doll division made in profit), Jill Barad was fired as CEO of Mattel (as of about April, interestingly enough, the same time that the DSS stopped shipping, according to the article), and Mattel, while still retaining its title of the largest toy maker on the planet, has suffered greatly- its stock has dropped from a high of near $60 down to around the $12-$15 mark. And _that_, dear friends, is the story of Mattel and the Learning Company.:) Open Source seems to be a good answer. Not buying shit software is a good answer. Let's be honest, many people who are reading (this far into this) are responsible for buying software that runs at your homes or offices. Choose wisely. Use your power.:) bye... r.
Slashdot Mirror
What many are missing is the fact that our fellow BOFHs have to learn _yet another_ OS.
There were a lot of MCPs for Win 95.
There are a lot of MCSEs for Win NT.
There are not as many MCSEs for Win 2k.
There are even less who can handle the innards of Win XP.
Training, and the inevitable learning curve (not to mention trying to figure out where and how to patch this new beast) will prove to be far far far more expensive than any silly upgrade cost.
Business people still can't see that one.
---It was written--- If it is a minor one, it might be fixed. If it's regular, it will be fixed some day. If it's big, it will be fixed and rather soon. If it's huge and does what you fear/describe, it will be fixed ASAP. ---end--- This is assuming that 1) Microsoft acknowledges the bug 2) Microsoft considers the bug to be 'huge' 3) Microsoft wants to or has a reason to release a bug fix. As is well known, MS releases major software with large numuber of major bugs- many of which are known about _months_ before release. This doesn't include the hundreds and probably thousands of minor bugs, errors and 'undocumented features' that fill up KB articles on a daily basis. ---more inclusion--- There are not so many precautions you can take, really, since no software company holds itself liable for any of its products. The best thing you can do to avoid the risk is simply by not using it. ---end--- Um. Given that MS has quite the stranglehold on the marketplace (I'll avoid the use of the work 'monopoly'. Oops. :| ) it is a bit unrealistic to 'avoid using MS software' at this time. Linux and alternatives should be explored and, as time goes and those products improve to a level where the non-geek can use them (remember the non-geeks all you Linux heads? There's a lot of 'em, you know) with some sense of ease. (side note, off comment, Linux has done a poor job, IMO, in marketing itself as 'user friendly').
---last inclusion---
I am sure insurance companies will insure you against horrible software plagues, they seem to insure almost anything including not getting any snow or sun on respectivily winter and summer holidays.
---end---
You've an unfortunately poor understanding of insurance companies then. Insurance companies will only cover you when they can be sure that they, the company, will collect enough from premiums _or from liable parties_ to make covering your losses worthwhile.
In case of thing in nature, there isn't a party to recover damages from. However, lets say your car breaks and causes you to have an accident. Your Happy Insurance Company pays out damages. Then it turns into Mean Insurance Company and sues the other driver, the car companies, etc (on your behalf, frequently) to recover those costs.
Insurance is not a philantropical business. :)
So, then. Are you thinking that the Good Insurance Company is going to give you money for when your software breaks (oh yeah, you have to prove that it wasn't your fault)? And that the Good Insurance Company is going to then try and recover those costs from the Software Company and be able to succeed?
Read your user agreement- you're taking the software _AS IS_. This means no insurance company in the universe is going to be insuring software any time soon.
And yes, to keep this on-topic, the activation code is just plain stupid, it attacks those who are the least likey to pirate significantly anyways, its meaningless technologically (given the fact that a crack was available less than 24 hours after the post of the latest beta) and its just all plain stupid.
peace,
r.
Sheesh people. Its not that hard. Look- at age 12 or so (yes, Virginia, there are surveys that back this up, do your own damn research), girls lose interest in computers. Up to about that point, girls and boys regularly enjoy computers. After that, nothing. Why? What sort of computer programs are there to attract the attention of girls? Do you really think a 13 year old girl is interested in playing the latest blood-bath game? Do you really think that a smart teenage girl is really going to get interested in a career in computers by playing 'Barbies Make-Up CD Kit'? Read this, software designers: There Is Nothing For Girls To Do On Computers. If You Make Something For Girls To Do On Computers, Then More Girls Will Learn To Enjoy And Use Computers. If You Make Software That Is Easier For Girls And Women To Navigate, More Girls And Women Will Use That Software. You Will Make More Money. Now, was that so damn hard?
The 5th and 6th points are actually pretty strong.
:)
The Supreme Court of the US consistantly has regarded the first amendment very strongly. In these two points, Boies is saying, basically, that because Napster is doing nothing wrong, their first amendment rights cannot be taken away.
Those rights include the ability to post lists of available music on-line, as Napster does.
The third point is strong in that there are legal limits to copyright use, those including 'space shifting' and 'fair use sampling'. Boies has some evidence that Napster is being used by people to listen (sample) music before purchasing. This is similar to reading a movie or book review- portions of the book are allowed under copyright law to be used in cases of review or to assist in making a pre-purchase decision. Those rights have been backed up with many precedences.
The whole point being: Napster has legitimate uses. Doesn't matter if the RIAA doesn't _like_ those uses, Napster can be used for legal means, and so shutting down Napster is illegal.
Its a good brief, and the argument that because the RIAA abused their copyright protection illegally, they no longer can defend their own copyrights...there is an interesting statment...
I wonder what the movie industry is burning in their offices today...
Here is some truth about Mattel and software. Back a few years ago, the head of the Barbie Doll division of Mattel (Jill Barad) became CEO of Mattel in what was considered at the time to be a reasonably unfriendly coup. After her rise, Mattel made two major purchases- one was the American Girl company (they make dolls, for 780 million) and one was the Learning Company (they 'make' software, and Mattel spent from 3-4 _b_illion dollars on the company). After the acquisition of the Learning Company (who had bought Broderbund a bit earlier to being bought by Mattel), Mattel went into serious E-Toy mode and released many many software packages, electronic gear, web sites, etc. It was Jill Barad's way of getting into the 'new market'. Well, as time passed, and people realized the new software sucked (ie- they stopped buying it...which is a BIG CLUE to those who are seeking to end the corporate realm. Make a product that doesn't suck and is easy to use and people will buy it), and, well, they stopped buying it. As of last year, the Learning Company division of Mattel lost some 1.1 billion dollars (equal, interestingly enough, to the amount of money that the Barbie doll division made in profit), Jill Barad was fired as CEO of Mattel (as of about April, interestingly enough, the same time that the DSS stopped shipping, according to the article), and Mattel, while still retaining its title of the largest toy maker on the planet, has suffered greatly- its stock has dropped from a high of near $60 down to around the $12-$15 mark. And _that_, dear friends, is the story of Mattel and the Learning Company. :) Open Source seems to be a good answer. Not buying shit software is a good answer. Let's be honest, many people who are reading (this far into this) are responsible for buying software that runs at your homes or offices. Choose wisely. Use your power. :) bye... r.